Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 2014-2015, 2014a

grant additional time therefor (Rule 34(b)).
Certain rules require that application for the relief or orders which they authorize be made
by petition. Since relief under those rules may not properly be sought by motion, a single judge
may not entertain requests for such relief. Thus a single judge may not act upon requests for
permission to appeal (see Rules 5 and 6); or for mandamus or other extraordinary writs (see Rule
21), other than for stays or injunctions pendente lite, authority to grant which is "expressly
conferred by these rules" on a single judge under certain circumstances (see Rules 8 and 18); or
upon petitions for rehearing (see Rule 40).
A court of appeals may by order or rule abridge the power of a single judge if it is of the
view that a motion or a class of motions should be disposed of by a panel. Exercise of any power
granted a single judge is discretionary with the judge. The final sentence in this subdivision makes
the disposition of any matter by a single judge subject to review by the court.
Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1979 Amendment
The proposed amendment would give sanction to local rules in a number of circuits
permitting the clerk to dispose of specified types of procedural motions.
Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1989 Amendment
The amendment is technical. No substantive change is intended.
Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1994 Amendment
Subdivision (d). The amendment makes it clear that a court may require a different number
of copies either by rule or by order in an individual case. The number of copies of any document
that a court of appeals needs varies depending upon the way in which the court conducts business.
The internal operation of the courts of appeals necessarily varies from circuit to circuit because of
differences in the number of judges, the geographic area included within the circuit, and other such
factors. Uniformity could be achieved only by setting the number of copies artificially high so that
parties in all circuits file enough copies to satisfy the needs of the court requiring the greatest
number. Rather than do that, the Committee decided to make it clear that local rules may require a
greater or lesser number of copies and that, if the circumstances of a particular case indicate the
need for a different number of copies in that case, the court may so order.
Committee Notes on Rules—1998 Amendment
In addition to amending Rule 27 to conform to uniform drafting standards, several
substantive amendments are made. The Advisory Committee had been working on substantive
amendments to Rule 27 just prior to completion of this larger project.
Subdivision (a). Paragraph (1) retains the language of the existing rule indicating that an
application for an order or other relief is made by filing a motion unless another form is required by
some other provision in the rules.
Paragraph (1) also states that a motion must be in writing unless the court permits
otherwise. The writing requirement has been implicit in the rule; the Advisory Committee decided
to make it explicit. There are, however, instances in which a court may permit oral motions.
Perhaps the most common such instance would be a motion made during oral argument in the